Corrective Action Plan - Subrecipient Monitoring Finding The City acknowledges the audit findings and recognizes the importance of strengthening internal monitoring practices to ensure full alignment with federal requirements. While there may be additional context to consider regarding the specific ...
Corrective Action Plan - Subrecipient Monitoring Finding The City acknowledges the audit findings and recognizes the importance of strengthening internal monitoring practices to ensure full alignment with federal requirements. While there may be additional context to consider regarding the specific circumstances, we appreciate the opportunity to clarify those details and outline the corrective actions that have been taken and are planned. Subrecipient #1 – Edmonds College One of the subrecipients noted in the finding is a public higher education institution operating under the State Board for Community and Technical Colleges (SBCTC). The subrecipient administered the Student Emergency Assistance Grant (SEAG) in accordance with state guidelines that emphasize low-barrier, equity-focused access to emergency aid. These guidelines intentionally discourage requiring extensive documentation from students and instead rely on: - Written applications and student interviews - Internal verification using the college's ctclink student system - Program-level data tracking through financial aid systems - Quarterly reporting to the City, which was submitted Due to FERPA protections, the college was limited in the level of personal data it could share externally without student consent. While this model limited the City's ability to independently audit eligibility at the individual level, it is consistent with the state's recognized approach to supporting systemically disadvantaged students and aligns with SEAG Program principles. The City accepted this structure as appropriate during the agreement period. Subrecipient #2 – Washington Kids in Transition For the second subrecipient, the City followed its standard internal audit process, which includes a quarterly review of 10% of submitted invoices to validate eligibility and ensure federal program compliance. After completing the first-quarter audit, the City identified concerns related to the supporting documentation for certain grant disbursements. In response: - The City escalated oversight and required the subrecipient to submit documentation for 100% of invoices from May through July, encompassing both Q2 and Q3. - Concurrently, the City became aware that the subrecipient had not initiated or completed a Single Audit for FY2023. Upon learning that the audit would not be submitted by the federal deadline (September 30), the City immediately ceased all grant funding and closed the program. - Though additional invoices were received in August and September, the City determined that the heightened audit activity from May through July had addressed the prior concerns. Q3 was considered to have been appropriately audited, and no further audit was conducted for the final period. The City has not resumed any partnership with this entity since September 2024. - The subrecipient ultimately declined to obtain the required Single Audit for FY2023 and FY2024. Review of Prior – Year Subrecipient Audit Requirements As part of the City's monitoring efforts for subrecipients from previous fiscal years, the Deputy Director of Finance at the time requested Single Audit reports directly from the two college subrecipients and was ultimately able to obtain the reports through the Federal Audit Clearinghouse (FAC). While the City does not have documentation to confirm this process, it was discussed during internal meetings that the reports had been reviewed, and this task was considered complete at the time. Of the four subrecipients referenced in the audit, the third was a nonprofit organization for which the Deputy Director reviewed publicly available financial records. Based on that review, it was determined the organization did not meet the $750,000 federal expenditure threshold and was therefore not subject to a Single Audit. The fourth subrecipient, the entity that did not complete the required audit, was addressed in the corrective actions outlined above. Planned and Ongoing Corrective Actions To strengthen subrecipient oversight moving forward, the City is implementing the following corrective actions: - Updated Subrecipient Agreements: All future contracts will include specific and detailed language regarding audit thresholds, access to documentation, and monitoring expectations, including reference to Uniform Guidance requirements. - Audit Verification Procedures: The City will implement a documented protocol for tracking and verifying Single Audits for any subrecipient receiving $750,000 or more in federal funds. - Monitoring Documentation: The City will maintain written records of all monitoring activities, including eligibility reviews, audit follow-up, and subrecipient communication. - Staff Training and Process Improvements: Staff responsible for subrecipient oversight will receive updated training on monitoring standards, documentation expectations, and federal compliance protocols. These actions will be implemented prior to any future program launches involving subawards of federal funds and will also apply to the monitoring of any current active grants. Although no additional funding of this type was issued in 2024, the City will be subject to audit for this period and will ensure compliance with all applicable requirements, including collecting the FY2024 Single Audit reports as required. Corrective Action Plan – Procurement "The City's internal controls were ineffective for ensuring it complied with federal procurement requirements. Although the City has written procurement policies, they do not address requirements for piggybacking and purchasing through a cooperative." Our response to the auditor's statements regarding the vehicles purchased with ARPA funds are as follows. "The City's internal controls were ineffective for ensuring it complied with federal procurement requirements. Although the City has written procurement policies, they do not address requirements for piggybacking and purchasing through a cooperative." - The City's Purchasing Policy addresses requirements for "piggybacking" and purchasing through a Cooperative in section 13.0 lnterlocal Agreements. However, the City should update the Purchasing Policy section 11.0 Procurement Using Federal Funds to include the same language that specifies the process of Interlocal and Cooperative agreements, or “piggybacking”. - As stated in the auditor's draft notification, state and federal requirements allow it to bypass normal procurement laws through a process commonly referred to as "piggybacking". This process allows entities to purchase goods and services using contracts awarded by another government or group of governments via an interlocal agreement or cooperative. When piggybacking, the entity must enter into an agreement before it purchases services or goods from another entity's contract. If the City uses such an agreement, federal regulations require it to confirm the awarding entity followed all procurement laws and regulations applicable to the entity when selecting the contractor. To ensure compliance, - Although the city did confirm that the vendor followed their own bid law requirements, the City will do a better job documenting that verification in any future equipment purchases using federal funding.